I remember seeing the film “Berkley in the 60s”  (a documentary about the free speech movement at Berkley College in CA which preceded and led to the hippie movement), and thinking to myself, “Man, these kids are so intelligent! I was a complete idiot when I was their age!” Perhaps this comes to mind because the sheer level of intelligence that surrounds me here at the Future of Music Coalition’s annual Policy Summit in DC. I am also here with Weathervane’s very own with Katonah Coster, too. She IS only 21. All around, I am thoroughly impressed.

Perhaps the most important thing I come away with from day 1 was a thorough understanding what the FMC is working toward. Founder and Policy Director, Michael Bracy described Radio’s demise since the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act which deregulated radio and within quick succession did away with locally owned, independent radio, making the chances of local independent artists receiving airplay near to impossible. He then explained the concept of Net Neutrality, which simply boils down to keeping telecommunications companies from limiting what their customers can access on the web. It’s amazing to understand the potential revenue Comcast could earn if they only allowed the highest bidder to distribute music through Comcast, for instance, and that Warner Bros could actually offer a package that allows customers to pay smaller bandwidth rates if they use the limited selection of net coverage WB “bundles” in the package. This was particularly insidious once explained.

The Future of Music Coalition decidedly concerns itself with matters of public policy, and therefore WON’T be putting its nose into private service providers’ matters. I for one, though, see this as a bit of a missed opportunity to be the voice they are for the musician. FMC believes that the marketplace will determine what flies, for instance, with regard to Spotify’s decision to only allow artists that are on labels to stream through their service. (See this article from the Guardian Aug 2009). This looks a bit like the “structural payola” Bracy defined in his conversation about Radio Policy, and while I know Spotify is NOT a part of the terrestrial radio and FCC monitored structure, it certainly seems like it could corner a market, and therefore have similar effects.  I personally don’t believe the average consumer will stop using Spotify with this knowledge (and for most they will never know what they are missing). This is not to say anyone can regulate service providers decisions, but musicians and consumers can use an informed voice. The FMC, clearly the most intelligent voice on behalf of the artist, should not miss key opportunities to clue consumers in on matters such as these and their ramifications.

I’ve been reading FMC articles for some time now, and they usually don’t miss such opportunities. … Just sayin’.